Quote:
How well is well-paid?
By Tan Hui Leng and Jasmie Yen, TODAY | Posted: 10 April 2007 1028
They expressed support for the need to pay top dollar for top talent in the public sector.
But Members of Parliament (MPs) who took part in yesterday’s parliamentary debate on the pay hike also spoke passionately about what many Singaporeans believe to be the heart of the issue: The benchmarking formula used to determine ministerial pay.
Ang Mo Kio MP Inderjit Singh noted that Singaporeans could not expect their leaders to serve based on altruism alone. “Are we willing to leave the future of the country to chance, that we will get good people who will give up their competence without caring about their salary?” he asked.
Some MPs, however, saw problems in benchmarking ministers’ pay to the private sector, pointing out to disparities in the risks taken by company chief executives and ministers and top civil servants.
Marine Parade MP Lim Biow Chuan said: “I struggle to understand what a top Admin Officer aged 32 at grade SR9 has to worry about that will justify him receiving $363,000 a year … From many people’s perspectives, they take no personal risk and are at best, paid employees.”
Opposition MPs Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir) and Hougang’s Low Thia Khiang took issue with the fact that Singapore’s ministers are paid more than their counterparts in developed countries.
MPs like Bishan-Toa Payoh’s Mrs Josephine Teo, however, pointed out that ministers in other countries may make more money after their term in office ends, such as through public speaking.
Some MPs voiced concerns about the timing of announcing the pay revisions, especially with the Goods and Services Tax (GST) due to rise to 7 per cent in July.
Mr Singh said: “How do we answer the man-in-the-street when we’re told that about one-quarter to one-third of the expected revenue increase this year from the GST is going to be for the proposed ministerial and civil service salary increases, about $240 million, I was told?”
Mr Low also referred to the recent debate on increasing the amounts for public assistance. “It’s also ironic that we are consuming taxpayers’ money and … discussing how much more of a fraction of a million to pay civil servants and ministers while we haggle over additional tens of dollars to hand out to our needy and disadvantaged citizens,” he said.
Some MPs who supported the pay hike also suggested that the salary benchmarking could be finetuned, such as pegging ministers’ salaries to more realistic markers such as top men in private equity firms and top companies based on market capitalisation.
Quote:
MINISTER Mentor Lee Kuan Yew called for a sense of proportion yesterday, pointing out that the annual wage bill for ministers and all office holders is $46 million - or just 0.022 per cent of Singapore’s total economic output.
It was an ‘absurdity’, he said, for Singaporeans to quarrel over whether ministers collectively should be paid $10 million or $20 million more, when an economy worth $210 billion was at stake
‘The cure to all this talk is really a good dose of incompetent government,’ he said in his first comments on impending salary increases for ministers and top civil servants. ‘You get that alternative and you’ll never put Singapore together again.’
Singaporeans’ asset values would also disappear, he warned, adding that ‘your apartment will be worth a fraction of what it is, your jobs will be in peril, your security will be at risk and our women will become maids in other people’s countries’.
He said the present system of benchmarking ministers’ pay to top private sector salaries was ‘completely above board’ and allowed the Government to recruit ‘some of the very best’ to lead the country
When it was put to him that people hoped for leaders who were willing to make sacrifices and who were not there for the money, he replied that these were ‘admirable sentiments’. But he added that ‘we live in the real world’.
His bottom line: if the Government could not pay competitive salaries, Singapore would not be able to compete and ‘we’re not going to live well’.
Among all the Ministers voted out, only George Yeo found a job in private sector though his friend was the owner of the company.
But other Ministers voted out who suppose to have sacrifice higher pay in private sector to join Government can only find jobs in NTUC, Civil Service and GLCs at lower salaries using PAP connections.
It means most Ministers are overpaid and not the ‘best’ after all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fed02
Get a life la… GE is already over.
WP is no saint too…
Yep, we have imperfect political parties hence no one imperfect political party should be extremely dominant alone, stay too long in power to build own biased corrupt networks, changed laws at will to suit themselves and create too many imperfect political situations.
PAP is doing a good job checking WP but WP has not enough strength to check PAP who dont want to be check. Listen to WP to understand them better then judge.
Eye candies inside.
Family received Edusave and Grassroots awards, active in grassroots events, friendly with PAP Grassroots Advisor but voted WP all long. Maybe SG is really changing to be less divisive and hostile about politics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fed02
And how does spamming videos will do for WP?
How about expect WP key members to hold higher level of standards?
Ah… nevermind… ignore me… i am not here to debate about politics.
You do not even watch WP rallies. read WP news, stay in WP areas or watch Parliament sessions and then accuse WP of this and that? How is it fair to WP?
How about holding PAP to higher standards then which you obviously do not? We have gone past the days that ‘PAP candidates have degrees and Opposition candidates are only ‘O’ Level standard’. If you are a boomer still reading 1980s PAP headlines, then your vote has not much value in today’s situation.
PAP has far more embarassing scandals that media and Govt play it down over these and every 5 years. Iswaran from corruption charge lowered down to become did not declare gifts which is so very much lighter. Then so many Ministers did any declaration for the expensive meal dates with trafficker and scam centre boss Su Haijin?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fed02
And how would you know? Ever thought what they put up was just a show?
The queries you make are without basis and so uneducated.
PAP was the one who increased their own salaries by 60% in 2007. PAP created ERP, COE, GST, ARF, stamp duty, taxes, NTUC, Grassroots and GLCs etc, increase taxes regularly, put their own people in GLCs, NTUC, Grassroots and feed themselves e.g bailing out SIA, SPH and SMRT
The only show Singaporeans saw every year is from PAP. From labubu tictok videos, to PA $1 deals, free ice cream, free tooth brush, HDB upgrading threats etc funded by all taxpayers.
Compare to PAP, WP did not do the bad policies, constant tax increase and protecting their own. PAP did well in early years but those good performance had been paid for by voters in past elections wins by PAP. There is no such thing as eternal servitude for past performances else no point having elections every 5 years.
https://mothership.sg/2025/05/alia-mattar-fake-quote/
GE2025
Singapore Matters Facebook page’s fake quote attributed to Workers’ Party Alia Mattar fact-checked
She was contesting in Punggol GRC.
author profile
Belmont Lay
clock
May 06, 2025, 12:26 PM
Workers’ Party politician Siti Alia Abdul Rahim Mattar, 43, has responded to a fake quote attributed to her during the 2025 general election campaigning period.
The 43-year-old lawyer, a candidate for Punggol Group Representation Constituency (GRC) alongside Harpreet Singh, Alexis Dang and Jackson Au, posted on Facebook on May 5, writing:
“The false image circulating about me has finally been fact-checked.
It is untrue and I hope that those who had concerns about it have their concerns put to rest.”
What fake quote said
Her post linked to an AFP Fact Check article calling out the fake quote circulated by the Singapore Matters Facebook page.
It was falsely claimed on May 1 in the now-deleted post that Alia said during the hustings: “The deciding factor for me joining the election was the Israel-Palestine conflict.”
“The Israel-Palestine conflict is more important than bread and butter issues,” the fake quote added, which was superimposed on a photo of Alia.
May 1 was two days before the Cooling-off Day on May 2.
What she really said
Contrary to what the fake post claimed, Alia said during her Apr. 24 rally that Singaporeans wanted to meet their members of parliament to discuss both local matters and the government’s position on global issues.
She did not say the conflict is “more important” than local Singapore issues.
Alia said in her rally speech: “The concern for the humanitarian crisis in Palestine crosses the boundaries of race and religion.”
She then asked why the Ministry of Education had added a course on the conflict without parents being consulted.
Parents then raised the issue with members of parliament.
“To have our voices heard is important to us as Singaporeans, ranging from local issues such as lift upgrading in the neighbourhood, to more major issues that affect Singaporeans as global citizens,” Alia said.
“We meet our MPs to discuss bread and butter issues, yes, but we would also like to meet our MPs to discuss the effects of certain laws or the government’s positions on certain global issues.”
The contest for Punggol GRC was won by the People’s Action Party (PAP) team comprising Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong, Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary, Minister of State Sun Xueling, and Yeo Wan Ling.
They beat the WP team with 55.17 per cent of the vote.
Top photos via Singapore Matters & Alia Mattar
Quote:
Originally Posted by
chubbybastard
You talk so much for what? Fact is PAP won 65% and in some places up to 80%. Suck it up lah. Singapore population is declining and the younger gen is getting lesser and lesser. More and more new citizens are minted every year and that number is only going to increase exponentially over the next 5 years. In the next 10 years newly minted citizens will outnumber local born singaporeans. If you think WP stand a chance to win a GE you are out of your fucking mind. Its like arguing how and why can’t the Singapore National Football Team win the World Cup. No chance. The sooner you realise this, make peace with this fact and plan your life around this the better. Kpkb about how WP is better is POINTLESS AND FUTILE.
WP should really rethink their strategy on how to win votes of these new citizens or they gonna end up like those pariah party like red dot or PAR that lost deposit.
With this mindset and attitude, most likely your kids and grandkids will be replace by New Citizens. Maybe you are the guy whose car park lot got snatched by a PRC New Citizen PAP supporter at Nomination Day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
antimatter
yap, kpkb here only give government one more reason to shut this forum.
I guess you are better off living in North Korea since you think SG Govt is as good as them.
https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/sin...r-jeffrey-siow
A COE benefits more Singaporeans if given to a private-hire car: Jeffrey Siow
Major changes to COE may be considered in the future, but for now the focus is on ERP 2.0, says the acting transport minister
Acting Transport Minister Jeffrey Siow says that private-hire cars help ameliorate rising Certificate of Entitlement premiums by providing private transport to a larger number of individuals compared to privately owned cars. PHOTO: BT FILE
Derryn Wong
Published Tue, Jun 17, 2025 · 05:00 AM
[SINGAPORE] A Certificate of Entitlement (COE) benefits more Singaporeans if given to a private-hire car (PHC) company than a private car owner, said Acting Transport Minister Jeffrey Siow.
In an interview with local media on Jun 11, he countered the idea that PHCs are “bidding up the prices of the COEs and therefore depriving Singaporeans of owning a car”.
As PHCs provide access to private transport on a pay-per-use basis, they drive down demand for COEs, he argued. Without PHCs to meet the needs for private transport, more people would want their own car.
“If you have one COE left to allocate, is it better… to give it to a private car owner who then drives maybe two trips a day and leaves the car in the garage, or is it better to share the car among a much larger group of Singaporeans who can have access to the use of a car when they need it? Surely it must be the latter, right?”
In the long term, Singapore could review the COE system as a way of allocating vehicles, he added.
“But my guess is that in the short term, there won’t be major tweaks.”
Asked how Singapore will continue to manage traffic congestion, Siow said the current focus is completing the roll-out of the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) 2.0 system, while autonomous vehicles (AVs) could help in the longer term.
“I think the focus now is just sort of replacing (ERP 1.0), making sure that we get the replacement on track and (making) sure that every car is installed. As I said, that will take some time,” he said.
“After that, we can take a look at what to do in the next phase,” he added, without elaborating.
The first-generation gantry-based ERP system is being replaced with satellite-based ERP 2.0 that allows for distance-based charging. Around 500,000 vehicles have been fitted with the new system as at June 2025, and the roll-out is expected to be completed by 2026.
Last year, then-transport minister Chee Hong Tat said the authorities were open to a one-off increase in the total vehicle population, spread over a few years, with higher usage-based charges to prevent congestion – but such a move would need to be carefully studied.
In thinking about the next phase of private transport policy, the starting point is the need to limit the total vehicle population, said Siow.
Then the consideration is what to do “at the edges, at the margins… to adjust that top-line number”, he said.
AVs could be a “game changer” for private transport if they eventually present a good alternative to owning a car, similar to PHCs now, he noted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
chubbybastard
Why don’t you fuck off from Singapore if you so upset with Singapore and Singaporean government? Like you say we’re full so please get the fuck out. PAP wansui!
Hi Amy.